As Tesla Board Circles the Wagons, Report Claims Musk Backed Out of SEC Settlement

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Yesterday’s end-of-day fraud lawsuit filed against Tesla CEO Elon Musk by the Securities and Exchange Commission needn’t have happened, CNBC reports. The CEO and founder turned down a settlement deal that would have seen him pay a “nominal” fine and remove himself as chairman, sources claim. Instead, Musk did what he does best. He went his own way, greatly increasing risk both to himself and his company.

Still, Tesla’s board stands by its man, releasing a statement late Thursday to this effect. According to Bob Lutz, outspoken industry titan, the board should have told Musk to hit the bricks.

Had Musk signed on to the settlement, he wouldn’t have had to admit guilt for tweeting “funding secured” on August 7th, part of an ultimately ill-fated attempt to take Tesla private. The settlement would, however, have kept Musk from the chairman’s position for two years, while compelling the automaker to hire two independent directors.

“This unjustified action by the SEC leaves me deeply saddened and disappointed,” Musk said to CNBC. “I have always taken action in the best interests of truth, transparency and investors. Integrity is the most important value in my life and the facts will show I never compromised this in any way.”

Says the man who accused a British rescuer he’s never met a “pedo” on Twitter, apologized, then called him a “child rapist” and dared him to sue, eventually getting his wish. It’s hard to ignore recent controversies at times like this, and Musk’s tendency for spur-of-the-moment social media bozo eruptions certainly doesn’t help his case.

In its lawsuit, the SEC claims Musk mislead investors and failed to inform the Nasdaq when he tweeted, in the middle of a trading day, his plan to take Tesla private at $420 a share. Yes, it turns out that is a drug reference. Interest expressed by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund apparently led Musk to believe the money would be there when he needed it. That potential funding wasn’t as secured as the CEO claimed. Musk abandoned the go-private bid on August 24th.

In a statement, Tesla’s board wrote,”Tesla and the board of directors are fully confident in Elon, his integrity, and his leadership of the company, which has resulted in the most successful U.S. auto company in over a century. Our focus remains on the continued ramp of Model 3 production and delivering for our customers, shareholders and employees.”

Feel free to discuss that awkward “over a century” line.

Should a judge rule in the SEC’s favor, Musk won’t just be gone from the chairman’s seat. The agency wants Musk barred from serving as the director of a public company. Tesla’s stock dropped more than 11 percent in early Friday trading.

If it was left up to Bob Lutz, Tesla’s board would thank Musk, then tell him to step down. The company is a “disastrous mess,” Lutz said while appearing on CNBC.

[Image: Tesla]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 27 comments
  • Mcs Mcs on Sep 29, 2018

    They've settled. Apparently, he's going to step down as chairman of the board and can't run again for 3 years. He can remain CEO. He has to pay a $20 million fine.

  • Art Vandelay Art Vandelay on Oct 01, 2018

    5 Years from now: The new Tesla S...Available at your Lincoln Motor Car Store or Cadillac dealer.

  • MaintenanceCosts Nobody here seems to acknowledge that there are multiple use cases for cars.Some people spend all their time driving all over the country and need every mile and minute of time savings. ICE cars are better for them right now.Some people only drive locally and fly when they travel. For them, there's probably a range number that works, and they don't really need more. For the uses for which we use our EV, that would be around 150 miles. The other thing about a low range requirement is it can make 120V charging viable. If you don't drive more than an average of about 40 miles/day, you can probably get enough electrons through a wall outlet. We spent over two years charging our Bolt only through 120V, while our house was getting rebuilt, and never had an issue.Those are extremes. There are all sorts of use cases in between, which probably represent the majority of drivers. For some users, what's needed is more range. But I think for most users, what's needed is better charging. Retrofit apartment garages like Tim's with 240V outlets at every spot. Install more L3 chargers in supermarket parking lots and alongside gas stations. Make chargers that work like Tesla Superchargers as ubiquitous as gas stations, and EV charging will not be an issue for most users.
  • MaintenanceCosts I don't have an opinion on whether any one plant unionizing is the right answer, but the employees sure need to have the right to organize. Unions or the credible threat of unionization are the only thing, history has proven, that can keep employers honest. Without it, we've seen over and over, the employers have complete power over the workers and feel free to exploit the workers however they see fit. (And don't tell me "oh, the workers can just leave" - in an oligopolistic industry, working conditions quickly converge, and there's not another employer right around the corner.)
  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh [h3]Wake me up when it is a 1989 635Csi with a M88/3[/h3]
  • BrandX "I can charge using the 240V outlets, sure, but it’s slow."No it's not. That's what all home chargers use - 240V.
  • Jalop1991 does the odometer represent itself in an analog fashion? Will the numbers roll slowly and stop wherever, or do they just blink to the next number like any old boring modern car?
Next